stadium arcadium
JohnThere was a piece in the New York Times yesterday about the upcoming Rays series in Orlando. Within the story, Stu Sternberg — the Rays managing partner — is quoted as saying “Baseball does not feel right indoors,” and that Tropicana Field “We recognize it has a shelf life of five years.”
This has stirred up a hornets nest of discussion as well as Sternberg having to further explain his comments. He’s not lobbying for a new stadium, he’s not asking for a new stadium, he’s not demanding a new stadium… He and his investment partners have put 20 million dollars into Tropicana Field the last two seasons and those monies weren’t just a five year investment when a much larger piece of change would be required if the team were planning to lobby for a new park.
To describe the situation as Rays fans know it — Tropicana Field won’t be replaced any time soon, especially with how crappy the ballclub has been since it’s inception nine years ago. It doesn’t warrant that kind of investment — no matter how much harping out-of-towners say about the park (or even locals who don’t attend games, citing the stadium as an excuse). The team is also locked in to a 30 year lease with hefty fines for breaking it… That alone locks the team in to St. Petersburg.
That being said, a dialog about a new stadium isn’t a horrid thing — it’s the absolution that a new stadium is needed and now because of blah, blah, blah. Insert your reasoning here.
I made mention in November of a St. Petersburg Times snippet about the Rays starting a dialog about a new ballpark. I don’t recall this being brought up in the latest hoopla or not. Regardless, there are two absolutes that need to remembered with the Rays and any talk of a new venue:
Tropicana Field is 16 years old, the stadium design itself was a relic of the 1970’s to keep the building energy efficient. The location of the stadium (downtown St. Petersburg) and it’s design have been debated and put into question time and time again over the course of the Rays existence
The Rays have no hope for a new venue as long as the team stays as pathetic as they have been since their inception. It’s just noteworthy the team is putting it’s toe in the pool regarding the stadium situation.
The second quote is the stronger reasoning. Both the Lightning and the Buccaneers offered the Tampa Bay sports fans a taste of competitiveness in order to earn the right to have the community invest in a new venue. The Rays haven’t even come close yet, and until they do, a new venue and talk of one is just a pipe dream.
Humor me though, there’s a new poll on Boltsmag asking readers where in the region a new Rays ballpark should be… Tampa? St. Pete? Gateway? Ybor? Out of town?
(originally posted by me on FanHome and modified for Boltsmag / Sticks of Fire)
Loading ...
May 13th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
Agreed, as long as they’re not competitive, it’s a moot issue.
I’d just add, that with the improvements over the past 2 years, IMO the Trop isn’t a horrible place to watch a ball game. I know it’s older and indoors (baseball belongs outside - roasting in the sun at Al Lang isn’t great either), but the lack of fans (except for BoSox and Yankees games) certainly doesn’t help the atmosphere either.
Reasonable entertainment for the price (I’d include USF football games at RayJay) and will miss not going to games when we move. As a side note, ran into a guy on a recent vacation who has been to almost all the mlb parks and he said the Trop was better than he expected, had a good time etc. Maybe he was just trying to be nice, but seemed genuine at least…
May 13th, 2007 at 5:03 pm
Matt — regarding your last statement, I took a friend from Calgary to a Rays/Giants interleague game before the new improvements happened… He also had the surprised reaction to the ballpark - expecting a lot worse from what he had heard.
It’s a common misperception that the stadium is like a tomb… In it’s previous life (pre renovations — 1990-96) perhaps it was… but it’s passable as a ballpark as-is and significantly better than some of the MLB parks that have recently expired/been replaced
May 13th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
One word: catwalks.
May 13th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Two words: Defining Characteristic.
Shea Stadium has the annoying planes from LaGuardia flying overhead. Wrigley has the ivy. Fenway has the Green Monster. Minute Maid Park (Houston) has the hill in the outfield. All of these features (and more features in more ballparks) come into play in one way or another.
Most times, defining characteristics get embraced in ballparks. Here? We consider them detrimental… Or at least seem to only mention them in a derogatory sense.
May 14th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Four words: World’s largest homeless shelter, because that’s what it will be when the Rays move into a new stadium.
May 14th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Sort of like the Tampa Museum of Art - who cares about the building if there is crap inside.
Lets build a team first.
May 14th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Mr. Bill summed it up perfectly.
As for Anonymous — so you actually expect St. Petersburg to act like a backwater burg and keep the stadium if the team leaves for a new home? My, that’d be a throwback reminder of why this region doesn’t get anywhere.
May 15th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
The D’ Rays need to move to Tampa where real fans don’t have to drive 45 mins. Baseball games should be more of an event (and less of a production just getting in and out) where people can go often to not only watch the game but socialize like at the AFS (previously XO) Club at the Forum. Build a stadium with a retractable roof where Riverfront Park is on the Hillsborough River opposite of Downtown and Tampa Prep. That park is full of drug dealers and hoodlums anyhow.